STRONG SUPPORT

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 4, 28 September 1937, Page 8

STRONG SUPPORT

• Press Associatiou.)

Proposed Motor Accident Legislation "NOT AN INNOVATION"

(Rv Te!(jzraph«-

AUCKLAND, Last Night. Emphatic support for the legislar tion promised by the Attorney-Gener-al, the Hon. H. G. R. Mason,. to eli-. minate the need to prove negligence as the basis for awards of damagea arising out of motor car accidents, was expressed by a prominent Auckland member of the legal professiori. "It is high time the Dominion had legislation along the lines indicated," he said. "I have read with some 6urpris® the somewhat severe criticism yoiced in various quarters in connection with the Minister's proposal," he said.. "As a matter of fact, every lawyer knows that a doctrine of absolute liability is by no means a legai innovation. Indeed„ there is absoiute liability at common law. "For example, were you to build m dam or a reservoir -on your own land, you would be merely exercising the ordinary rights of property. Nevertheless, you do so at your own peril, and should the water escape and do damagie to your neighbour, you would be liable in damage, no matter how careful you might have been to prevent the escape of the water., This. waa made clear in the Fletclier v. Ryiands decision over 70 years ago. " "Again, if a. farmer wants to clear • his land, it is a most uatural and proper tning that he Bhould iight a fire, and in so doinfij he is merely exercising the rights of property. Should the fire Bpread beyond the bounds of his own land, however, or even a spark therefrom start another fire, a mile away and damage result, the farmer is responsible."' Cass of Blastfng Accidents. The 6ame rule, he added, applied to any dangerous material.- There was che case in England ndt more than 20 years a&o, where a person suffered a fractured skul? as Ihe. result of a stone flying from a quarry a quarter of a mile. distaut,. .-where blasting was being carried dut. The person recovered heavy damages, .despite the fact that every care had .been used to prevent an accident. Also, if a lion or a tiger were .to escape from the zoo, no matter how formidable might have been the bare of the cages, anyone sutfering damage would have the right, of action. ' , "So much for common law," he'.continued. "Coming to statutory ..provisions in the saihe directionj-it' may not be generally known that as a result of a section in the Dog Regjstration Act, everyone who keeps a dog doea so at his own risk. No matter how thoroughly he may chain the animal, if it. breaks loose and - does damage, the owner is liable^ EVeryone was familiar with the Workers' Compensation Aet, in virtue of which all employers of labour were made legally responsible for- accidente causing injury, quite apart from any, question of negligence. Another apposite illustration was aft'orded by -the New Zealand Racing Conference. That body levied an annual stribnte on every horse owner to provide an accident fuud, and, though not legally liable, it , paki ' compensation ' f kr beyond the scale prescribed by tho Workers' Compensation Act. - "I' am, not in the Minister's confidence," . he said,. "so I do not know the details 'of hi's proposals, but (I believe ' that -its determining principles will be:. (I) . Limitation of liability; (2) the elimination of the .jury, or rather, its replacemeut by iwo assessors, one appointed by the Qrown and the other by the insurance companies; (3) within the limits of their respective jurisdiction, these cases will be taken in .the Magistrate's Court and the Supreme Court." In the result, he continued, everyone injured in a motor accident would .be entitled to some monetary repar- ■• ation; -and he could only say -that it was high time that the Dominion had legislation on the lines indicated. Most lieart-rending cases had occurred where no rCdress had been possible btcauso of the inability of tbe person concerned to* prove negligence. No Escape from Liabijity? \ It was safe to say that the great majority of motor accidents were duo to negligence and doubtless that fact weighed with juries. However, the Minister proposed to eliminate negligence and to assure everyone of a remedy As a result there would bo no extravagant damages and no eseape from liability. ' "I have no hesitation ih s'aying1 that the greatest proportion of people in this country will approve of the proposals, and for my paft I think the Minister. is entitled to every credit for the courage he shows in prdposing a proper solution for an intoierable situatiou." The i>roposals would not make an end of litigation inasmuch as differences of opinion in every case as to the extent of in juries were certain. The only evidence, however, which would be necessary would be that of "the medical witnesses